Method to improve requirements, design manufacturing, and transportation in mass manufacturing industries through analysis of defect data

ABSTRACT

A computer-implemented method of optimizing at least one of a design, production and testing process in a mass manufacturing process includes steps of: collecting error data relating to a product; classifying the error data into categories of symptoms; mapping the symptom to a revealing condition of the product; mapping the revealing condition to a test type; mapping a scope of a fix to phases of error injection mapping; and recommending modifications to an end user for at least one of the design, production, delivery, and testing process based on the scope of the fix.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a division of, and claims priority from,commonly-owned, co-pending U.S. application Ser. No. 11/926,556, filedon Oct. 29, 2007, which is a division of U.S. application Ser. No.11/330,823 filed Jan. 12, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,305,325.

STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED-RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

None.

INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A COMPACT DISC

None.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates generally to the use of information technology inindustrial processes and more specifically to mass manufacturingprocesses.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Minimizing costs and improving product quality is a goal of any productdevelopment company. To the manufacturer one of the most costly aspectsin a product's life cycle is servicing product defects after the producthas left manufacturing. Present methods use quality control tests on amanufactured item that are done by a single department such as a qualitycontrol department. Such tests are expensive to perform and it is alsoexpensive and difficult to use the results. One present technology isOrthogonal Defect Classification (ODC) which addresses software defectsfound during development and by customers, but only software, nothardware and only defects found during development. Another known methodis Orthogonal Problem Classification (OPC), which addresses softwareproblems reported by customers, but does not address mass manufacturingindustry, it only addresses software.

Another technology, Warranty Management Solutions (WMS) facilitateshandling by management of warranty related data but provides no feedbackto modify production. Quality Control testing products before productrelease provide no feedback mechanism back to production and designfacilities.

Therefore, there is a need for a solution that overcomes thedeficiencies of the prior art.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Briefly, according to an embodiment of the invention, acomputer-implemented method of optimizing at least one of a design,production and testing process in a mass manufacturing process includessteps of: collecting error data relating to a product at a plurality ofpoints along its design, production, and distribution chain; classifyingthe error data into categories of errors to provide classifier errordata; analyzing relationships among the classified error data; producingan analysis report; and recommending modifications to an end user for atleast one of the design, production, delivery, and testing process basedon the analysis report.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

To describe the foregoing and other exemplary purposes, aspects, andadvantages, we use the following detailed description of an exemplaryembodiment of the invention with reference to the drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is a simplified illustrative block diagram of a mass-manufacturedproduct handled by a method according to one embodiment of theinvention;

FIG. 2 is an illustrative flow diagram of the mass manufacturingindustry's production, testing, and delivery processes according to oneembodiment of the invention;

FIG. 3 is an illustrative schematic diagram of a network architecturefor one embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 4 is an illustrative block diagram of a PSEC Server according toone embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 5 is an illustrative flow diagram of the operation of a PSEC Serveraccording to one embodiment of the invention; and

FIG. 6 is an illustrative flow diagram of the operation of the PSECMethod according to one embodiment of the invention.

While the invention as claimed can be modified into alternative forms,specific embodiments thereof are shown by way of example in the drawingsand will herein be described in detail. It should be understood,however, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are notintended to limit the invention to the particular form disclosed, but onthe contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalentsand alternatives falling within the scope of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

We describe a computer-implemented method for optimizing the productionand testing of products produced by a mass manufacturer, i.e. where many(virtually) identical copies of a given product are produced in exactlythe same way. This is in contrast to cases where heroic, unique methodsare used each time. The preferred embodiment will describe how thecurrent invention is used to optimize the production and testingprocesses of a mass manufacturing plant 3010, whose products 1000 aresold by a product dealer 3020 and repaired by a product service provider3030 (as will be described in detail with references to FIGS. 1-5).

FIG. 1 is a component block diagram of an example of the product 1000produced, sold and serviced in the preferred embodiment. As shown, theproduct 1000 includes a subsystem 1010, which includes a part 1020.Although only a single subsystem 1010 and a single part 1020 are shown,the current invention is also applicable to products 1000 that includetwo or more subsystems 1010 and subsystems 1010 that include two or moreparts 1020. An example of such a product is a personal computer(product), a communication subsystem (the subsystem), and a chipset(port) according to a protocol such as the Ethernet.

FIG. 2 is an illustrative flow diagram of the mass manufacturingindustry's production, testing, and delivery processes 2000 according toan embodiment of the invention. As shown, the overall process 2000begins at step 2010 where the design of the product 1000 is created.Next, in step 2020, the design is reviewed, and, if any errors (defects)are identified, control continues at step 2010, where the identifieddesign error is corrected. Otherwise, in step 2030, an instance of thepart 1020 is built, followed by step 2040 where the instance of the part1020 is tested. If an error is identified, then step 2050 checks whetherit is a part error. If so, control continues at step 2030 where theerror is corrected.

If the error is not a part error, then it must be design error and socontrol continues at step 2010 where the design is corrected to overcomethe error. If no part error is found in step 2040, then controlcontinues at step 2060 where an instance of the subsystem 1010 is built.Next, the instance of the subsystem 1010 is tested in step 2070. If anerror is detected, then in step 2080 the error is checked to determineif it one with the subsystem. If so, control continues at step 2060where the subsystem error is corrected. If the detected error is not onewith the subsystem, then control continues at step 2050, whichdetermines how the detected error, either a part or design error, ishandled, as described above.

If step 2070 does not detect any errors, then step 2090 is executed,where an instance of the product 1000 is built, following which theproduct 1000 instance is tested in step 2100. If an error is detected,then in step 2110 the error is checked to determine if it one with theproduct. If so, control continues at step 2090 where the product erroris corrected. If the detected error is not one with the product, thencontrol continues at step 2080, which determines how the detected error,either a subsystem, part or design error, is handled, as describedabove.

If step 2100 does not detect any errors, then step 2120 is executed,where an instance of the mass manufactured product 1000 is created usingthe mass manufacturing process (e.g., including but not limited to anassembly line, and robotics), following which the mass manufacturedproduct 1000 instance is tested in step 2130. If an error is detected,then in step 2140 the error is checked to determine if it is an errorwithin the mass manufacturing process (e.g., the bolts that attach thewheels are not being sufficiently tightened). If so, control continuesat step 2120 where the mass manufacturing process error is corrected(e.g., wheel bolts are screwed on more tightly). If the detected erroris not an error within the mass manufacturing process, then controlcontinues at step 2110, which determines how the detected error, eithera product, subsystem, part or design error, is handled, as describedabove.

If step 2130 does not detect any errors, then step 2120 is executed,where the instance of the mass manufactured product 1000 is transportedto the Product Dealer 3020 (described in detail with reference to FIG.3). Once delivered, mass manufactured product 1000 instance is tested instep 2160. If an error is detected, then in step 2170 the error ischecked to determine if it one with the transportation process (e.g.,the product's paint scratched by the vehicles that carry the product tothe Product Dealer 3020). If the error is one with the transportationprocess, control continues at step 2150 where the transportation processerror is corrected (e.g., the products are covered with a protectivewrap before being shipped). If the detected error is not one with thetransportation process, then control continues at step 2140, whichdetermines how the detected error, whether it is a mass manufacturingprocess, product, subsystem, part or design error is handled, asdescribed above.

Skilled artisans will appreciate that any of test processes other thanDesign Review 2020 (i.e., Part Test 2040, Subsystem Test 2070, ProductTest 2100, Mass Manufacturing Test 2130 and Transportation Test 2160)could include stress testing (i.e., operating a given component [i.e.,part, subsystem or product] up to or beyond one or more of its specifiedmaximum limits) and environmental testing (i.e., testing a givencomponent in one or more of is specified maximally adverse conditions).So, for example, the Part Test 2040 for tires could include running theinflated tires repeatedly of a series of bumps (for stress testing).Similarly for environmental testing, the Manufacturing Test 2130 couldinclude driving each car (cars being the product) through 110 degree(Fahrenheit) heat.

FIG. 3 depicts a network topology 3000 providing an executionenvironment implementing the functionality of a system for the currentembodiment. The network topology 3000 includes: a Mass ManufacturingPlant 3010; a Product Dealer 3020; a Product Service Provider 3080; aClient D 3130, and a PSEC Server 3050. The Mass Manufacturing Plant 3010comprises a location, including, but not limited to a building, or setof buildings, co-located or geographically distributed, wherein a ClientA 3100 and an instance of mass manufactured product 1000 (MMP1 3060) islocated. This location 3010 is where instances of the mass manufacturedproduct 1000 are created.

The Product Dealer 3020 comprises a location, including, but not limitedto a building, or set of buildings, co-located or geographicallydistributed, wherein a Client B 3110 and an instance of massmanufactured product 1000 (MMP2 3070) is located. This location 3020 iswhere instances of the mass manufactured product 1000 are sold.

The Product Service Provider 3030 depicts a location, including, but notlimited to a building, or set of buildings, co-located or geographicallydistributed, wherein a Client C 3120 and an instance of massmanufactured product 1000, MMP3 3080 are located. This location 3030 iswhere instances of the mass manufactured product 1000 are repaired orserviced.

Each of Clients A-D 3100-3130 and the PSEC Server 3050 are able tocommunicate with each other via a network 3090. The network 3090comprises: the Internet, an internal intranet, or a public or privatewireless or wired telecommunication network.

Skilled artisans will appreciate that although only one each of the MassManufacturing Plant 3010, the Product Dealer 3020 and the ProductService Provider 3030 are depicted in FIG. 2, other embodiments are alsoapplicable to cases where there are a greater number of one or more ofthese entities 3010-1030. Skilled artisans will also appreciate thatother embodiments are also applicable to cases where the three entities3010-3030 are co-located.

Each of Clients A-D 3100-3130 enable an authorized user to interact withthe PSEC Server 3050 (as will be discussed in further detail below) withreference to FIGS. 3-5. An example of a platform that supports theClients A-D 3100-3130 includes any computing node that can act as webclient (i.e., runs a web browser application and can communicate withthe PSEC Server 3050 via the network 3090). Such software comprisesMicrosoft's Internet Explorer™. Still another example of a platform thatsupports the Clients A-D 3100-3130 includes, but is not limited to: anIBM ThinkPad™ running on a Windows based operating system such asWindows XP, or like operating system. Other contemplated operatingsystems include Linux, UNIX, and the like.

Clients A-D 3100-3130 may also include network-connectable mobile (i.e.,portable) devices such as some cellular telephones (i.e., devices whichfunction as a cellular telephone and execute network applications, likeweb browsers).

Although only four Clients A-D 3100-3130 are shown in FIG. 1, thecurrent invention is also applicable to any number of client nodesgreater than or equal to 1.

Further, while the preferred embodiment includes a Web-based (i.e.,HTTP) client 3100-3130, other forms of network communication are alsoapplicable, such as a sockets-based client/server architecture, e.g.,implementing secure sockets layer (SSL) or like network communicationsprotocols.

Skilled artisans will appreciate that the current invention is alsoapplicable to cases where there is only a single client node, whichresides on the same machine as the PSEC Server 3050, thereby eliminatingthe need for any network communication at all.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of the PSEC Server 4050. The PSEC Server 4050is a computing node that acts as an HTTP server. The PSEC Server 4050includes a CPU 4000, a network interface 4010, and a storage device 4020such as a disk or data access storage device (DASD), and memory 4030,such as RAM. The network interface 4010 allows the PSEC Server 4050 tocommunicate with other network connected nodes via the network 4090.Such interfaces include, but are limited to: Ethernet, and wireless IP(Internet Protocol, e.g., LEAP, CDMA or WAP).

In the present embodiment, the PSEC Server 4050 also includes PSECServer logic 4040, which is embodied as computer executable code that isloaded into memory 4030 (for execution by CPU 4000) from a remote source(e.g., over the network 4090 via the network interface 4010), localpermanent optical (CD-ROM), or from the storage device 4020 (e.g. diskor DASD).

The PSEC Server logic 4040 stored in the memory 4030 includes an HTTPServer Handler 4050, which includes a PSEC Client Applet 4060 and a PSECClient Interface Servlet 4070. The PSEC Server logic 4040 furtherincludes a Defect Data Collection Handler 4080, a Defect DataClassification Handler 4090, an Analysis Handler 4100, a SuggestedActions Report Handler 4110, and a PSEC Server Database 3120.

The HTTP Server Handler 4050 is an application that can respond to HTTPcommunications, comprising: the WebSphere™ product sold by IBM.

The PSEC Client Applet 4060 and PSEC Client Interface Servlet 4070together enable an authorized end-user to communicate with the DefectData Collection Handler 4080, Defect Data Classification Handler 4090,Analysis Handler 4100, and Suggested Actions Report Handler 4110. Whenthe end-user wants to interact with the PSEC Server 4050, the end-userfirst downloads the PSEC Client Applet 4060 to a web browser running ontheir client, Clients A-D 4100-4130. To download the PSEC Client Applet4060, the end-user must provide sufficient credentials (e.g., user IDand password).

After the PSEC Client Applet 4060 has been downloaded and enabled, thePSEC Client Applet 4060 communicates directly with the PSEC ClientInterface Servlet 4070, which is executing in the HTTP Server Handler4050. The HTTP Server Handler 4050, in turn, communicates locally withthe other handlers 4090-4110 executing on the server 4050. Skilledartisans will recognize that this applet/servlet paring is well known inthe art (e.g., see Jason Hunter with William Crawford, Java ServletProgramming (Sebastopol, Calif.: O'Reilly & Associates, Inc., 1988), pp.277-337). Skilled artisans will also appreciate that the communicationbetween the Clients A-D 4100-4130 and the handlers 4090-4110, in otherembodiments can be implemented using other socket-based applications.

The PSEC Server Database 4120 allows the PSEC Server 4050 to store,modify, and delete data related to misinformation, usage patterns,users, and online community servers. A detailed description of theinformation maintained by the PSEC Server Database 4120 is given below.The PSEC Server Database 4120 can be implemented using database toolssuch as the DB/2 product sold by IBM, and like database platforms. Onewith skill in the art will appreciate that in other embodiments, thePSEC Server Database 4120 can be a service that runs on another serverand is accessed by the PSEC Server 4050 via the network 4090.

The Defect Data Collection Handler 4080 enables the current invention togather a set of defect data regarding the mass manufactured product 1000and the processes of its production, testing and delivery 2000. Thisdata includes but is not limited to: Defects founds during product 1000development, such as design defects discovered during the design review2020, Defects found in instances of the product 1000 after manufacturing2110, but before delivery, such as cases where the mass manufacturingprocess 2120 has failed to tighten the bolts that hold the wheels on.Defects that occur as a result of the transportation process 2150, suchas paint being chipped during shipping due insufficient securerestraints in the delivery vehicle, and Defects found at the ProductService Provider 3030, such as a case where an unreliable tire isidentified by the fact that many instances of the product 1000 arebrought in where one or more of the tires has burst during operation.Note that this data comes from in-process and post delivery. All suchdata is stored in the PSEC Server Database 4120.

The Defect Data Classification Handler 4090 takes all of the storeddefects and either types or adds types to each defect, storing resultsin the PSEC Server Database 4120. This set of attributes categories andassociated values is called the PSEC scheme. It is it uses some of thecategories and values of the ODC scheme, as well as adding newcategories and new values.

In the current invention there are two types of defect attributes:opener data, that which is known when the defect is first discovered,and closer data, which is only available after a given defect has beenresolved. In the current invention, the opener data associated with eachthat is stored in the PSEC Server Database 4120 comprises:

Unique ID, which can be used to distinguish one defect from all others.

VIN (Vehicle Identification Number), which, in the preferred embodimentis the unique encoded alphanumeric string that every automobile hasassigned to, this string not only including a unique ID (serial number)for the car, but also indication the car's make, model, andmanufacturing plant (for details, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIN).

Ownership Duration indicates long the product was owned before thedefect occurred. In one embodiment of the current invention theserevealing conditions include, but are not limited to (note that they arelisted in order of shortest to longest):

-   -   Short—Year or less,    -   Medium—1 to 5 years,    -   Long—5 years to disposal.

One skilled in the art will appreciate that the current invention alsoincludes embodiments in which the Ownership Duration attribute has moreor less than 3 values, and in which the values differ from those above(values applicable for the automotive industry). Such alternatives areneeded for other mass manufacturing industries, such as the aeronauticsindustry, whose product: planes are owned and used for well over 5years, on average. Thus the Long value would have to be greater than 5.Such values are also necessary because different industries havewarranty periods of different length.

In the current embodiment, the closer data associated with each that isstored in the PSEC Server Database 4120. In addition to openers andclosers, there are mapped attributes whose values for a given defect arecomputed from other attributes for the given defects. There are alsoderived attributes whose values for a given defect can only be computedwhen all of the defects and all other attributes have been computed #Units Affected, indicates the total number of product instances thathave suffered from this same defect. It is derived by counting thenumber of defects that identical part # and corrective action value.

Every defect is classified with each of the attributes above with all ofthe data stored in the PSEC Server Database 4120. Note that the PSECScheme includes data concerning not only software, but hardware andelectronics as well (e.g., in the Parts Hierarchy). Further, note thatthe PSEC Scheme also includes data and analysis techniques targetingmass manufacturing production processes (e.g., Test Type:ManufacturingTest and Phase of Defect Injection: Manufacturing).

As is described in detail with reference to FIG. 6, the Analysis Handler4100 uses the classified defect data stored in the PSEC Server Database4120 to provide data for and answers to questions related to theproduction and testing process of the mass manufacturer.

As is described in detail with reference to FIG. 6, the SuggestedActions Reports handler 4110 compiles the charts and text results storedin the PSEC Server Database 4120 to generate a report containingsuggested modification to one or more production or testing processes inthe mass manufacturing industry's production, testing, and deliveryprocesses. Such suggestions can include, but are not limited to theaddition of a new test phase, or an indication of whether or not a givenproduct is ready for public sale. In addition to textually describedsuggestions, the report can also include graphical charts justifying thegiven suggestions, often more than two or more such graphical charts persuggestion.

A skilled artisan will appreciate that the current invention alsoincludes a PSEC scheme that includes the service context in which agiven defect was found as an attribute, with values including but notlimited to: scheduled maintenance, nonscheduled maintenance, and productrecall.

A skilled artisan will further appreciate that the current inventionalso includes a PSEC scheme that includes the attributes that indicatethe complexity level—e.g., indicated numerically—of other attributes.Examples include, but not limited to Condition Revealing DefectComplexity: 1 for Single Function 2 for Single Function with Option 3for Interaction and Sequencing 4 for Workload/Stress,Recovery/Exception, Startup/Restart, Environmental, and Stress.

FIG. 5 is a detailed flow diagram of the operation of the PSEC Serverlogic 4040. In step 5010, the HTTP Server Handler 4050 awaits an HTTPrequest. When such a request arrives, step 5020 checks whether it is arequest for the Defect Data Collection Handler 4080. If so, this handler4080 is invoked following which control continues at step 5010.

If the request is not for the Defect Data Collection Handler 4080, thenstep 5040 checks whether it is a request for the Defect DataClassification Handler 4090. If so, this handler 4090 is invokedfollowing which control continues at step 5010. If the request is notfor the Defect Data Classification Handler 4090, then step 5050 checkswhether it is a request for the Analysis Handler 4100. If so, thishandler 4100 is invoked following which control continues at step 5010.If the request is not for the Analysis Handler 4100, then step 5040checks whether it is a request for the Suggested Actions Report Handler4110. If so, this handler 4110 is invoked following which controlcontinues at step 5010. If the request is not for the Actions ReportHandler 4110, then a miscellaneous handler, beyond the scope of thecurrent invention, is called in step 5070, following which controlcontinues at step 5010.

Referring to FIG. 6, a flow diagram 5000 of the operation of the currentembodiment is shown. In particular, a case involving an automobilemanufacturer is given. First, in step 6010 all defect data for aparticular make (e.g., Ford) and model (e.g., Corvette) of car iscollected by the Defect Data Collection Handler 4080 from any of ClientsA-D 3100-3130 via the PSEC Client Applet 4060. Skilled artisans willappreciate that any additions could be made manually (i.e. by a humantyping information into a computer running the PSEC Client Applet 4060via a web browser, or by an automatic data collection program, alsowhich communicates with the PSEC server 3050 via the PSEC Client Applet4060).

Thus, the current embodiment allows a given mass manufacturing industryto automate its defect data collection. Skilled artisans will appreciatethat this defect data includes in-process production data (e.g., datafrom the Mass Manufacturing Plant 3010), as well as post-sales, servicedata (e.g., from the Product Dealer 3020, or the Product ServiceProvider 3030).

Next, in step 6020, the defect data is classified using the Defect DataClassification Handler 4090, again via accesses from Clients A-D3100-3130. Skilled artisans will appreciate that although theclassifications may be made by employees of the manufacturingorganization (e.g., Ford), including but not limited to domain experts,a service organization could also provide one or more of theclassifications.

A skilled artisan will appreciate that if a given mass manufacturingorganization obtained its parts 120 or subsystems 1010 from anothergiven component supplier, and if that given component supplier used tocurrent invention to analyze its defects, then the mass manufacturingorganization could use the PSEC scheme-based classified defect data forits own defect analysis.

Next, in step 6030, using the Analysis Handler 4100, relationshipsamongst the classified data are sought to answer questions relevant tothe mass manufacturer (e.g., which production process(es) is(are)producing the defects that drive the majority of the warranty costs?).This research can also provide indications of salient problems. Forexample, suppose that a chart displaying the number of defects thatescape from (i.e., are not caught by) each of the test processes 2020,2040, 2070, 2100, 2130 and 2160 shows that vast majority come from thePart testing phase 2040.

Then, if the goal of the given mass manufacturer is to save money, moreattention and/or resources (e.g., time, and personnel) should be spenton Part testing 2040, so as to keep these defects from escaping to thelater stages where they are more expensive to overcome.

The Analysis Handler 4100 also includes rules that test the classifieddata to answer specific questions. Skilled artisans will appreciate thatone or more of these rules can be provided when the current invention isfirst provided to a given organization (e.g., mass manufacturer). Anexample of such a rule would be one that reviews the Product Impact ofthe defects and then specifies the given product's reliability:e.g.,“high” returned if none of the defects made the product inoperable,“average” if only a few did, and “low” if most defects did.

Finally, in step 6040, the current invention compiles a chart andresults into a report using the Suggested Actions Report Handler 4110.Skilled artisans will appreciate that the Suggested Actions ReportHandler 4110 could implement either of following methods: Automaticcompilation of all charts and results generated by the Analysis Handler4100 and stored in the PSEC Server Database 4120, or Allowing anend-user to select the charts and results they wish to include and thencompiling only entities into the final report. A skilled artisan willappreciate that one or more members of a service organization couldprovide the chart and result selection described above instead of anemployee of the mass manufacturer,

A skilled artisan will also appreciate that the current invention couldbe executed multiple times by a given organization, e.g., periodically,say once a year, or to every new version of a given product. By doingthis and comparing the results of each execution (e.g., comparing thereports produced in step 6040) the benefits realized by the givenorganization could include: Verifying that they are overcoming problemindicated in earlier reports, e.g., by checking the previous problemseither vanish or are less severe in later reports. Verifying that theirproduct are becoming more stable, reliable, or safe, e.g., by comparingthe respective levels of stability, reliability, and safety betweenreports; or Verifying that are maintaining a sufficient level ofproduction and testing quality, e.g., by verifying that no new or higherseverity problems are reported in later reports.

A skilled artisan will further appreciate that PSEC analysis reportsfrom different organizations could be compared so as to judge thestrengths and weaknesses of the organizations.

A skilled artisan will also appreciate that by using the both ChargeType attribute (i.e., whether or not the defect's repair was covered bywarranty) and the Repair Cost attributes, the analysis provided by theAnalysis Handler 4100 and reported by the Suggested Actions ReportHandler could include consideration of each defect's warranty cost.Thus, a given organization interested in reducing their warranty-relatedcosts could use the current invention to indicate relevant problems andto suggest corrective modifications to their production and testingprocesses.

A skilled artisan will also appreciate that by comparing and analyzingthe classified defects data, especially using the In-Process attribute,the current embodiment can be used to compare defects that escaped(i.e., were created and yet not caught) the product's development andproduction to those that occurred out in the field.

A skilled artisan will finally appreciate that the current embodimentcould be provided as a service by a service organization to the massmanufacturer. This service could include the service organizationcollecting the defects, classifying the defects, analyzing theclassified defects and generating the report summarizing the analysis.This service could be offered on a continuing basis, e.g., the serviceorganization could analyze and provide an analysis report to the massmanufacturer each year. The service could also include modifications andupdates to the PSEC scheme used to analyze the given mass manufacturer.

A skilled artisan will further appreciate that variations,modifications, and other implementations of what is described herein mayoccur to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from thespirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, the invention is definedby the following claims and not to be defined only by the precedingillustrative description.

1. A computer-implemented method of optimizing at least one of a design,testing, manufacturing, and delivery process for a product in a massmanufacturing process, the method comprising: collecting error datacomprising a symptom relating to the product; mapping the symptom to arevealing condition of the product; mapping the revealing condition to atest type; mapping a scope of a fix to phases of error injectionmapping; and recommending modifications to an end user for at least oneof the design, testing, manufacture, and delivery of the product basedon the scope of the fix.
 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the steps ofcollecting, mapping the symptom, mapping the revealing condition,mapping the scope, and recommending modification are performed atregular intervals are performed at scheduled intervals.
 3. The method ofclaim 1 wherein the steps of collecting, mapping the symptom, mappingthe revealing condition, mapping the scope, and recommendingmodification are performed at regular intervals are performed for everysubsequent version of the product.
 4. The method of claim 1 whereinmapping the symptom comprises classifying the symptom into at least oneattribute selected from a group consisting of: phase when found, vehicleidentification, unique identifier, open data, close data, customerimpact, ownership duration, product impact, non-product impact, scope offix, corrective action, responsible agent, part history, part hierarchy,part number, number of hits affected, and complexity level.
 5. Themethod of claim 4 wherein the classifying is derived automatically. 6.The method of claim 5 wherein the classifying is based on at least oneof: a scope of fix, action, and a duration of ownership, and a phase oferror injection.
 7. A computer node in a network, said computer nodecomprising: a central processing unit; a network interface coupled withthe central processing unit for enabling communication with othercomputer nodes in the network; a storage device; a database; and amemory comprising logic for: receiving an http request; determiningwhich handler among a plurality of handlers to invoke in order toprocess the request; and invoking the handler; wherein the plurality ofhandlers comprise: an error data collection handler for collecting errordata comprising a symptom relating to the product, and storing the errordata in the database; an error data classification handler forclassifying the error data and storing results of the classifying in thedatabase; an analysis handler for using the classified error data storedin the database for: mapping the symptom to a revealing condition;mapping the revealing condition to a test type; and mapping a scope of afix to phases of error injection mapping; and a suggested actions reporthandler for recommending modifications to an end user for at least oneof the design, testing, manufacture, and delivery of the product.
 8. Thecomputer node of claim 7 wherein said computer node is an HTTP server.9. The computer node of claim 7 wherein the handlers are embodied aslogic within the memory and executing on the computer node.
 10. Thecomputer node of claim 7 wherein the database comprises a PSEC serverdatabase.
 11. The computer node of claim 10 wherein the memory furthercomprises: a PSEC client handler; and a PSEC client interface servlet.12. A computer readable storage medium comprising computer programinstructions for enabling a computer to optimize at least one of adesign, testing, manufacturing, and delivery process for a product in amass manufacturing process, wherein said computer program instructionscause the computer to execute steps of: collecting error data comprisinga symptom relating to the product; mapping the symptom to a revealingcondition; mapping the revealing condition to a test type; mapping ascope of a fix to phases of error injection mapping; and recommendingmodifications to an end user for at least one of the design, testing,manufacture, and delivery of the product based on the scope of the fix.13. The computer readable storage medium of claim 12 wherein the stepsof collecting, mapping the symptom, mapping the revealing condition,mapping the scope, and recommending modification are performed atscheduled intervals.
 14. The computer readable storage medium of claim12 wherein the steps of collecting, mapping the symptom, mapping therevealing condition, mapping the scope, and recommending modificationare performed for every subsequent version of the product.
 15. Thecomputer readable storage medium of claim 12 wherein the symptomcomprises at least one attribute selected from a group consisting of:phase when found, vehicle identification, unique identifier, open data,close data, customer impact, ownership duration, product impact,non-product impact, scope of fix, corrective action, responsible agent,part history, part hierarchy, part number, number of hits affected, andcomplexity level.